Tag Archives: caylee anthony

Coffee and Donuts – DSK, Casey Anthony, NYPD rape trial

Casey Anthony murder trial verdict leaves prosecutor stunned by jury’s not guilty ruling

It looks like DNA evidence is in and circumstantial evidence is out. Well DNA has been in for quite sometime now. I fear that it has now become the sole barometer of guilt or innocence in criminal trials.  No DNA evidence, no conviction. I see the day coming when the District Attorneys Office will determine whether or not to prosecute a case on the availability of DNA evidence. Who bears responsibility for this prevailing belief? Do we blame science or television?

 
Dominique Strauss Kahn faces further claim of sexual assault

Maybe the victim in the DSK assault case has given newfound courage to other women who may have been victims of DSK. It seems that Tristane Banon could have been another victim of the “great seducer” had it not been for a well placed kick to a part of his anatomy – the part that he enjoys forcing into the mouths of women. Let’s see if the French press portrays  Tristane Banon as narcotrafficker, money laundering, money grubbing, lying crack ho.

French See Case Against Strauss-Kahn as American Folly
 
Who really cares about how the French feel about how the DSK case has been handled? It apears that we have reawakened a dormant anti american feeling in France. If the French really feel that strongly about it, maybe they should just boycott visiting the U.S. We in turn could do the same. Let’s see who cries uncle first. This coming from a country where men treat women as “boy toys,” where women endure sexual harassment because it’s considered part of their culture. Tristane Banon, the latest DSK accuser saids it best, “I didn’t want to be known to the end of my days as the girl who had a problem with the politician.”

 
Documentary footage sinks rape-case probe; accused cops seek mistrial

The only hope for a small sliver of justice for the Gap executive who accused two former New York City Police Officers of rape (they were subsequently acquitted, but convicted of official misconduct) may be lost. It appears that Lisa Friel, who at one time headed the Sex Crimes unit, might have had a touch of celebrity fever. The desire for fame, fortune and her own reality show may be cause for a Judge to declare a mistrial on the official misconduct conviction. I have a great idea for the name of her new show: “Law and Morons”.

Advertisements

Jury fails: no justice for Caylee Marie

Casey Anthony Not Guilty In Slaying of Daughter

The Casey Anthony verdict once again exemplifies our great criminal justice system at work. Twelve ordinary people sit and hear the facts of a case for six weeks and return a verdict that has most of us thinking, if not saying, “WTF?”. We can’t condemn the system that we so vehemently defend when the verdicts don’t go the way that we believe that they should. Or, should we be condemning a system, which is based on principles that some, such as myself, believe are inherently flawed? Principles such as society would rather let a hundred guilty men go free than to convict one innocent man. Good in theory but not when a guilty defendant gets off scot free. I wonder what the Caylee Anthonys of the world would have to say about our wonderful and fair criminal justice system, if only their voices could be heard.

Twelve ordinary people decide the fate of the accused, most probably never having set foot in a court of law, other than maybe traffic court, most having limited knowledge of criminal law, and less about the rules that govern a court proceeding. Do you really think that most jurors know or understand why a prosecutor or defense attorney may stand up and yell “objection” during a witness’s testimony? Do you think they understand the principles of trial law that compel a judge to either sustain or overrule that objection?

I remember the first few times that I testified at trials and hearings. I had no clue what the hell was going. I remember one prosecutor telling me during trial prep to pause before answering questions asked of me by the defense attorney.

“Pause,” I asked, why?”

“I may have an objection and I don’t want you blurting out answers to certain questions that we may not have to answer.”

I was a cop not a lawyer, and I knew nothing of trial law. I read up on it and asked questions, and eventually I got to the point where I knew while the question was still being asked that it was going to be objected to. Yet we expect these twelve ordinary individuals to decipher all the courtroom mumbo jumbo and listen to all types of testimony, from forensic experts to the defendant’s mother. For six weeks they sit and listen. Then a judge gives them instructions and if they find the defendant guilty, it must be beyond a reasonable doubt, a standard that in my opinion is too high and often not tenable. Trials are no longer about guilt or innocence of the accused. They’re about defense attorneys who can create the slightest sliver of doubt in a juror’s mind, a doubt that at times can be based on no credible evidence, just on an assumption that an accused wouldn’t have done this or that, or have behaved in a manner so foreign to the rest of us after committing a heinous crime. Why wasn’t there DNA evidence like there is all the time on TV? Can’t ANY doubt be considered reasonable? If the defendant is guilty, why isn’t there 100% proof? It’s about emotion rather than facts.

Is it time that we change the current standard of guilt in criminal trials from beyond a reasonable doubt to the standard used in civil cases, preponderance of the evidence? Why, in a democratic society where majority rules, do we use a different standard in criminal trials? Why must a jury’s verdict be unanimous? The Supreme Court of the United States of America isn’t held to the same unanimous standard when deciding issues that affect a larger portion of the American public in ways more profound than the murder of a little girl.

So if Casey Anthony didn’t kill her daughter, who did? Someone murdered that little girl, and since no one else will ever be charged with the crime, no one will ever be held responsible for her death. There is, and will be, no justice for Caylee Marie.